Hi All,
[Oops apologies for 1/2 message sent before. Memo to self: never Alt-Tab
with your right hand, :-) ]
>> > 2. Tie-breaking rule
>> >
>> > I chose to break ties by rewarding the first to post.
>> > I suppose other ways are possible (e.g. reward the more
>> > efficient one) but they all seem a little artificial.
>>
>> This seems fair to me. First in Best dressed. I don't think that
>> efficiency and Golf should ever be mentioned in the same sentence :)
>
>`First wins' is not good IMO, perhaps some additional scoring like
>for example using non-average(usual) solution is better? this is
>arguable of cource but it is just an idea... of cource this won't
>be factor for different strokes count solutions...
I agree, "first wins" is a little cruel depending on your time-zone and
spare time.
IMHO a solution to a good hole should be in the 50-70 char region. That way
there's more scope for "styling" the response. Such styling could include:
- the least number of /a-z/i chars.
- the largest number of times a chosen bonus character is used
- inefficiency of the algorithm
My particular favourite is how "sorted" the code is
$code="for(0..9)print";
@chars = map {ord($_)} split //, $code;
for ($x=0; $x+1 < @chars;$x++) {
$score++ if ($chars[$x]<$chars[$x+1]);
}
print $score
I can hear my big sister saying "now thats just silly!" :-)
Alistair
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Alistair McGlinchy, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sizing and Performance, Central IT, ext. 5012, ph +44 20 7268-5012
> Marks and Spencer, 3 Longwalk Rd, Stockley Park, Uxbridge UB11 1AW, UK
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 1:33 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Possible improvements for the next golf apocalypse
>
> "Anthony J. Breeds-Taurima" wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, 9 Dec 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > > While it is still fresh in everyone's minds, I thought I should
> > > make some notes on possible improvements for the next apocalypse.
> > >
> > > 1. Timing
> > >
> > > We probably all spent more time on this than we can afford.
> > > I think 5 days was too long; 2-3 days feels about right.
> > >
> > > It seems fairest to announce the game start time two weeks (say)
> > > before the event, to give people time to prepare.
> >
> > I think that 5 days was good. Or you could have 2 games going
> > Newbies and Guru. The Holes would be the same BUT the duration would be
> > different. ie (Newbies 5 days, Guru 2-3 days). Update the scores and
> announce
> > the winners at the 2-3 day mark BUT don't release the code. Would that
> be too
> > cruel a punishment for the gurus.
>
> I think a weekend would be fine (i.e. 2 non-working days)
>
> >
> > > 2. Tie-breaking rule
> > >
> > > I chose to break ties by rewarding the first to post.
> > > I suppose other ways are possible (e.g. reward the more
> > > efficient one) but they all seem a little artificial.
> >
> > This seems fair to me. First in Best dressed. I don't think that
> > efficiency and Golf should ever be mentioned in the same sentence :)
>
> `First wins' is not good IMO, perhaps some additional scoring like
> for example using non-average(usual) solution is better? this is
> arguable of cource but it is just an idea... of cource this won't
> be factor for different strokes count solutions...
>
> >
> > > 3. Number of Holes
> > >
> > > Though 9/18 is traditional in golf, five seemed sufficient to
> > > provide an interesting spread of scores. Any more than five
> > > may be unnecessarily cruel.
> >
> > No more than 6.
>
> 8 :)
>
> >
> > > 4. Hole Difficulty
> > >
> > > When I posted the game, I thought the holes were too easy.
> > > In retrospect, I think they were about right because they were
> > > simple enough to allow novice golfers to have a go, while still
> > > providing a challenge for the elite golfer.
> >
> > This level was good. As a newbie, I was certain that I could complete
> the
> > game thought I wouldn't be too far off the pace.
>
> nothing is too easy :) I think any task wich can be solved with regular,
> readable, non-tricky, few lines (screenpage?) solution will be ok
>
> >
> > > 5. Individual Hole Scores - to post or not to post?
> >
>
> don't -- just total.
>
> P! Vladi.
> --
> Vladi Belperchinov-Shabanski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Personal home page at http://www.biscom.net/~cade
> DataMax Ltd. http://www.datamax.bg
> Too many hopes and dreams won't see the light...
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Registered Office:
Marks & Spencer p.l.c
Michael House, Baker Street,
London, W1U 8EP
Registered No. 214436 in England and Wales.
Telephone (020) 7935 4422
Facsimile (020) 7487 2670
www.marksandspencer.com
Please note that electronic mail may be monitored.
This e-mail is confidential. If you received it by mistake, please let us know and
then delete it from your system; you should not copy, disclose, or distribute its
contents to anyone nor act in reliance on this e-mail, as this is prohibited and may
be unlawful.
The registered office of Marks and Spencer Financial Services Limited, Marks and
Spencer Unit Trust Management Limited, Marks and Spencer Life Assurance Limited and
Marks and Spencer Savings and Investments Limited is Kings Meadow, Chester, CH99 9FB.
